694

When we speak of the "Big-Pharma Industry," it does not refer solely to private drug manufacturers. The complex, like a Matrix that holds captive the health of the World in medical slavery by its own design and manipulation, is a Consortium, a Spiders’ Web woven with financial attachments throughout the medical profession.

This is a plan by design of the pharmaceutical manufacturers, meaning the pharmaceutical giants have manipulated the entire bunch of us - patients and doctors - to continue to look to their pharmaceutical drugs as the end all, be all of these chronic diseases. Their sole intent is to keep us on their drugs, not to find a real cure, and it’s of little consequence to them that these drugs cause harm and suffering. [...] A fifteen-year veteran of the pharmaceutical industry says that the pharmaceutical companies are not in the business of 'health and healing' but instead the business of 'disease maintenance and symptom management.'
(Big-Pharma Industry, Chemical Hell on Earth)

This is simply outrageous! These big corporations have manipulated our simple basic need to live a healthy life, risking even our lives, for profit! That is unacceptable! We have to fight! We should never take any medicine produced by these companies! We can use cures that is available abundantly in nature. Big Pharmas pay a lot of money to suppress the research revealing the benefit of herbal medicine, ignoring testimonies from hundreds of grateful patients. It is our blood money!

Oh how I love conspiracy theory :D

I finished Ben Goldacre's first book, 'Bad Science' a couple of weeks ago and I'm currently reading his second book, 'Bad Pharma'. Let's talk about 'Bad Science' first. It's been a while since I read a book from back-to-back in one go (admittedly spanned across a few days, but that's a matter of practicality and available spare time), especially a non-fiction book. It's a really engaging book, well-researched and very informative. Ben is, of course, a medical doctor himself and he knew what he was writing about, sometimes from first-hand experience. Next to that, he's a good journalist with a great sense of humor.

'Bad Science' talks about how some (self-)claimed science practices is not only don't do what should be done in science, they do what should not be done instead. A big part of the book is dedicated to attack nutritionist and homeophaty and the likes. He points out the flaws and possible dangers, but he's quite fair in Jeff-Winger's-take-on-paul-rudd-and-religion kinda way: 'I see the appeal, and I would never take it away from anyone. But I would also never stand in line for it.' He doesn't even blame Andrew Wakefield in the vaccination chapter.

When attacking claims such as 'Brazilian scientists have investigated the potential of plant extracts in the battle against … MRSA, and they suggest that the herb pau d’arco could have a role to play in protecting hospital patients from these infections', Ben was often accused of being a pawn of Big Pharma companies. It's not an entirely implausible of course. However the aforementioned claim in this paragraph ended with '…You can order pau d’arco supplements from Rio Trading (01273 570987); 120 capsules cost @£15.99. Take four a day.' As Ben put it himself 'Quacks and the pharmaceutical industry use the exact same tricks to sell their pills, everybody loves a “science bit” – even if it’s wrong – and when people introduce pseudoscience into any explanation, it’s usually because there’s something else they’re trying desperately not to talk about.' It's amusing at the very least.

Furthermore, Ben does attack pharmaceutical industry on 'Bad Pharma'. I'm still reading but the gist so far is that there is a bias in publication and trial data are often missing, or hidden. Awkay maybe we should return a little bit more. The Golden Age of Medicine (somewhere between the 1930s and the 1970s) when the most important drugs – be it paracetamol or antacid – were invented had gone. Now pharmaceutical industries struggling for inventing new drugs for, not only new diseases, but also old diseases with a known cure already. Therefore it's very competitive just to put a drug in the market. Hence the efforts to make trial data looks good in any way. It IS conspiratory and manipulative in many ways, but maybe not in the way bad-pharma scaremongers think.

PS #1: The case of prescribed medicine and insurance, especially in the US, is a whole another story. This probably appeals more to the conspiracy theorists.

PS #2: I arrived to the quote at the beginning of this writing using keywords big+pharma+terrorism (after not satisfied with results from big+pharma+myths and big+pharma+facts). Admittedly there was a big grin in my face :D

PS #3: You can read an excerpt of 'Bad Science' here.